Why Time Might Not Be an Illusion

Dear Wei Xu,

You wrote: "It is critical to define Visible. Normally, as a human we have limitation to sense the existence even not by any tools we created." That am finite misinformation. There am no need to define Visible. If "normally" humans had any finite limitation of their sense of existence, it would logically follow that "abnormally" humans would have no limitation of their sense of existence. Visible reality am not sensible.

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before you chose to write: "It becomes cristal (sic) clear that there are two (finite abstract invisible) domains of the (finite abstract invisible) scope: (finite abstract) physical and (abstract invisible) virtual states or (finite abstract invisible) worlds."

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Dear Joe, Marcel, Wei Xu, and others,

I know there are lots of self-published articles claiming to solve physics' problem with time and nonlocality. Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of physics and then starts from clearly-stated postulates.

H.R.

Good paper, downloaded for study.

My claim was ....

"The rate of time slows down as we move toward the ground. This means longer seconds. In order for c (m/s) to remain constant, longer seconds means longer meters. In other words, an object is falling into larger space.

So, space is not contracting in a gravitational field; it is in fact

expanding. The apparent contraction is an illusion. Falling into larger space is dispersion, the hallmark of thermodynamics.... "

- Do you consider gravitational fall as a dispersive event (as above)? i.e thermodynamically spontaneously driven?

Marcel,

A free fall (no friction) is not a dispersive or dissipative event and there is no entropy production. Potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. Only at impact or with air resistance is there dissipation. With no entropy production, the event takes place within a single instant of irreversible time, within an interval of reversible time symmetry. I don't think scales are relevant in this case. This response will make sense after digesting the article.

H Marcel,

I went to your first post in this thread. What article were you referring to? I did not see an entry from you in the recent contest. (I only discovered it 2 days after it closed.)

Harrison

My updated article is here

Dear Harrison Crecraft,

Let us try it one more time.

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before "lots of self-published articles claiming to solve (finite) physics' problem with (finite INVISIBLE) time and (finite INVISIBLE) nonlocality were ever published." Even before you wrote: "Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of (finite INVISIBLE) physics and then starts from (finite) clearly-stated postulates."

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

THE REAL UNIVERSE CONSISTS ONLY OF ONE SINGLE UNIFIED VISIBLE INFINITE SURFACE OCCURRING ETERNALLY IN ONE SINGLE INFINITE DIMENSION THAT AM ALWAYS ILLUMINATED MOSTLY BY FINITE NON-SURFACE LIGHT.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Dear Harrison Crecraft,

Let us try it one more time.

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before "lots of self-published articles claiming to solve (finite) physics' problem with (finite INVISIBLE) time and (finite INVISIBLE) nonlocality were ever published." Even before you wrote: "Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of (finite INVISIBLE) physics and then starts from (finite) clearly-stated postulates."

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

THE REAL UNIVERSE CONSISTS ONLY OF ONE SINGLE UNIFIED VISIBLE INFINITE SURFACE OCCURRING ETERNALLY IN ONE SINGLE INFINITE DIMENSION THAT AM ALWAYS ILLUMINATED MOSTLY BY FINITE NON-SURFACE LIGHT.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Dear Harrison Crecraft,

Let us try it one more time.

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before "lots of self-published articles claiming to solve (finite) physics' problem with (finite INVISIBLE) time and (finite INVISIBLE) nonlocality were ever published." Even before you wrote: "Here's another. However, I don't know of any other that questions the foundational assumptions of (finite INVISIBLE) physics and then starts from (finite) clearly-stated postulates."

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

THE REAL UNIVERSE CONSISTS ONLY OF ONE SINGLE UNIFIED VISIBLE INFINITE SURFACE OCCURRING ETERNALLY IN ONE SINGLE INFINITE DIMENSION THAT AM ALWAYS ILLUMINATED MOSTLY BY FINITE NON-SURFACE LIGHT.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Hi Marcel,

Physics describes a system within an instant of irreversible time, and your question is definitely relevant. I need to ponder a bit.

Joe,

I don't think I disagree with anything here. The article expresses an objective realism without need for observers--if that is what you are trying to say.

Harrison,

My entry is at https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2977 .

Thanks for the update. Will get back to you on this

Thanks,

Marcel,

Dear Harrison Crecraft,

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before you wrote that: (finite) Physics describes a (finite) system within an (finite) instant of (finite INVISIBLE) irreversible time

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Dear Marcel-Marie LeBel,

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before Harrison Crecraft wrote that: (finite) Physics describes a (finite) system within an (finite) instant of (finite INVISIBLE) irreversible time

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

I'll not defend the Minkowski block universe other than to recognize it as a step in the process of development of Relativistic measurement. It firstly assumes, and that assumption has been trivialized as a matter of expediency, that the scale of a span of length in space is identical to the scale of a span of duration in time. Realistically we must then assume that such a one to one correspondence of scale must exist only as a special case, perhaps for example as localized to a quantum state of equilibrium at the core of a material particle. Globally however, it removes the relationship of time, and that of space, from the Relativity in physical processes.

I think that what causes much perplexion for many in addressing Relativistic discourse is that our human experience preconditions us to think of both time and space as simply 'being there', that processes happen in that background. But what the simple geometry of SR actually reveals is that both time and space interact with physical processes. Not even time acts instantaneously in its effect on a process, there is not only the rate of a span of duration, but also a rate at which the effect of that span interacts with space in the process. jrc

Re. spacetime and the Grandfather paradox: "We still don't know how to deal with that one," T. Short

How to deal with it. Spacetime is generated through observation. It is produced by the amalgamation of information obtained from potential sensory data that has been received together i.e. within a small finite interval. Outside of that amalgamation construct and the observer, is EM radiation and other potential sensory information, that is distributed in uni-temporal (same time everywhere ) space. Neither what is seen in the spacetime construct nor what is encoded in the potential sensory data is material objects. Grandfather, the flesh and blood man, is a material object. That material object itself is not within spacetime, the visual product, but within uni-temporal space. For the material man there is no other time to be at, so he can not travel to the past, even though images that appear to depict the past can be formed using received information.

The above explanation allow unambiguous sequential change of material reality and processes, while still allowing non simultaneity of perceived (or device product) events related to the receipt and processing of signals , and prohibits temporal paradox

Dear John R. Cox,

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before any humanly contrived misinformation concerning a finite abstract "Minkowski block universe" was ever published.

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

The only thing that am causing y'all any perplexity am your obstinate refusal to understand that reality am infinite, and your trying to explain reality using finite language information cannot sensibly succeed.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Dear Georgina Woodward,

Irrefutable evidence exists that conclusively proves that the earth had a real VISIBLE surface for millions of regular Gregorian calendar years before any humanly contrived misinformation concerning a finite abstract "spacetime and the Grandfather paradox" was ever published.

It logically follows that Nature must have designed the only REAL VISIBLE structure of the real planet earth, and the real VISIBLE Universe the real VISIBLE earth am contained in, obtainable.

The real Universe consists only of one real single unified VISIBLE infinite surface eternally occurring in one single infinite dimension that am always mostly illuminated by finite non-surface light.

The only thing that am causing y'all any perplexity am your obstinate refusal to understand that reality am infinite, and your trying to explain reality using finite language information cannot sensibly succeed. I do hope that you understand.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

Joe you are a source of perplexity. You seem oblivious to the significance of the solution I have provided. Dispelling the paradoxes of relativity while still allowing there to be non simultaneity of observed events but also allowing unambiguous sequential foundational passage of time. Your own "revelation" does not fit with mainstream physics and does not provide solutions to specific problems in physics.

You use the phrase real visible structure. Yet the 'universe' you describe does not permit the process of vision to occur. There are lots of different things to consider, perception, visual products, sensory stimuli and the potential sensory information received, and material objects and particles, sources of the potential sensory information they reflect or emit allowing transmission from source to observer.

I have recently watched a video called 'Mind the gap' about the difference between perception and external reality. Perception being an interpretation formed from sensory inputs and application of prior learning. We do not experience what 'is there' but a reasonable supposition of the possible causes of the inputs received. That is why we can come up with such different conclusions about how the universe functions, and have different experiences of the same events..

While two equally useful explanations can be ranked so that the simplest is probably more likely correct, two explanations, one of which solves multiple problems and the other does not can not be usefully ranked using their simplicity. They need to be ranked according to usefulness. I am not seeking peace of mind in the certain knowledge of being a part of an infinite surface, and so your explanation is of no use to me, nor, I should think, anyone else concerned about the physics of the universe(s) we (humankind) inhabit physically and mentally.